"Equality" according to Feminists

[betsy]

This is a continuation of the argument that started in the topic, The Bible. It started with the Biblical character named Lot, who was drugged with wine and raped, by his two daughters.

This scenario raised the parallel with modern day date rape.

The argument continues with member Melanie's feministic stance that somehow, Lot is still at fault even though the parallel is obvious.

Melanie:

Ok, it seems it is possible. Probably incredibly rare, as this seems to be the only case Google can find, but still possible.

This grudging and condenscending attitude....this seeming inability to afford the same sensitivity (and justice) to anyone- regardless of gender - is one of the things I so hate about the feminist movement. This is my reply to the above statement.

What's rareness got to do with it? Just because it happened to only 1 man, does that somehow lessen the crime (especially since the rape was done to a MAN and not the other way around)?

You probably envision a world ruled by amazons!

Seriously, Feminists like you do more harm to the sensible feminists fight for equality! Not only that, it's an insult to all sensible women! This kind of mentality only perpetuates the misconception that women are airheads!

That's why I'm so against your type of feminism! And I try to ridicule this kind of feminism that claims to speak for all women! You don't speak for me, or for others who think like me.

Phooey! You go out screaming bloody equality when you don't even have a clue what equality means

Edited August 30, 2012 by betsy

[betsy]

the following is the string of discussion relating to this toipic. It is more convenient for the reader that I post them here - so they'll understand how it all came about.

Pretty sure our resident feminist granny has an idea or two on male female anatomy and the workings of same.

I suggest you grab material, medical book, porn whatever, and study the workings because the 'parallel is NOT quite clear and precise.

A woman can have sex without being conscious , a man cannot.

Guyser:

A woman can have sex without being conscious , a man cannot.

A man can have an erection when unconscious, so why couldn't he have sex?

From my understanding the mans dream states would dictate it, and if unconscious his stimulation would have to come from the mind (impossible to manipulate for the woman)not externally.

But if a woman took advantage of a man's dream states sexually, wouldn't that constitute rape?

Edited to add:

I found this example of a woman having sex with a man while he was passed out and the woman got pregnant and sought child support:

-S.F. v. Alabama ex rel. T.M., 695 So. 2d 1186 (Ala. Civ. App. 1996). In that case, the father testified that he went to a party at the mother's house. He had been drinking for several hours before he arrived, and had in fact gotten sick on the way to her house. At the mother's house, the father continued to drink, and the last think he remembered was getting sick again and his brother putting him in bed at the mother's house. The next morning, the father awoke in that same bed with only his shirt on. The father did not remember having sex with the mother, and he did not knowingly and purposely have sex with her.

The father's brother testified as to the same facts. A friend of both the mother testified as to the same facts, plus the fact that about two months after the party, the mother said she had sex with the father while he was "passed out" and that it saved her a trip to the sperm bank. Another friend testified that the mother had said she had sex with the father, "and he wasn't even aware of it."

A physician testified that it is possible for a man who is intoxicated to the point of losing consciousness may nevertheless have an erection and ejaculate; they are not conscious, voluntary activities.

link

Then that's very obviously what happened. I didn't realize the bible included a pornography section though.

Ok, it seems it is possible. Probably incredibly rare, as this seems to be the only case Google can find, but still possible.

Edited August 30, 2012 by betsy

[betsy]

betsy, on 29 August 2012 - 08:41 AM, said:

Like I said - as seen through the eyes of a non-believer. Of course I'm not forcing you to agree with me.

That could also have been said about date-rape victims - if we follow your rationalization.

Why would you buy the story of an adult woman not only getting drugged - but also having been so careless, what with all the news media about this - thus finding herself in a position of having had sex without even knowing about it? C'mon....you gotta be kidding me.

The parallel is quite clear and precise - only the reversal of gender. Your feministic ideology is blinding you....

Anyway, are you an authority on drugs and alcohol?

Why? Have you ever imbibed the drug that you'd know for a fact they're truly out-of-it?

I don't know anyone who'd gone through date-rape - so I can't say for sure if they're truly out of it or not......BUT I've seen some who got so drunk and acted so foolishly and yet has no recollection of it the next day, whereas I know of some too, who had vague recollections of what had transpired. So I guess it depends on the individual how alcohol affects them.

But this is not about what you buy or not. Yours, then, is just an opinion - and therefore shouldn't be taken as a serious argument.

To you, this is about gender.

Whether the story of Lot is true or fiction - the parallel with date-rape is still there.

Well, true or not, ironically what you're saying is that your feminist stance which is hinged on relativism - has no set standard at all! Therefore, your "indignation" over your so-called "discrimination" is plain ridiculous, and quite hypocritical.

You're the one who discriminates.

You think that under the same circumstances, Lot (being a man) should be held accountable for the "crime" committed by two females, and yet you wouldn't consider the same on date-rape cases. So you're either very confused (taken in by all the hype of feminism and naivete)...or blinded by your feminist ideology! Talk about reason!

Interesting how you've made huge assumptions about my position on so many things! You're jumping to conclusions here, based on what you think I would say, rather than on anything I actually said.

I'm not jumping to conclusions. You made your position quite clear!

Edited August 30, 2012 by betsy

[Black Dog]

W.

T.

F?

[cybercoma]

Would you like to make a clear and concise argument here?

[j44]

This is why I never come to this section of the forum.

[Canuckistani]

I'll play. If a woman gets a guy drunk and then gives him a blow job without his consent, that's sexual assault. You all are assuming that rape has to involve penetration of the vagina, but why, since it's the guy being raped?

Here's wiki:

Much like female erectile response and contrary to popular opinion, male erectile response is involuntary,[21][22] meaning that a man need not consent for his penis to become erect and be placed in a woman's vagina. Penetration of a man by a woman is possible through forcible stimulation of external male genitalia or the anus, or by forced penetration of the anus with the use of strap-ons, dildos, other foreign objects which could include a tongue (inserted or external) in forced oral, forced digit manipulation, and digital penetration. A woman could also force a man to perform oral sex on her. Rape of a man by a woman could also occur when limited sexual activities are agreed upon and a man's penis is placed in a woman in violation of the limits that had been set. Rape of a man by a woman is thus possible in several ways.

However, male victims of sexual abuse by females[23] often face social, political, and legal double standards.[24] While gender-neutral laws have combated the older perception that rape never occurs to men,[25] and other laws have eliminated the term altogether,[26] the double standards still remain.

Here's a question. Assange is charged with rape because he did not use a condom. How about if a woman lies about being on the pill, is that rape as well?

[Guest American Woman]

I'll play. If a woman gets a guy drunk and then gives him a blow job without his consent, that's sexual assault. You all are assuming that rape has to involve penetration of the vagina, but why, since it's the guy being raped?

Here's wiki:

Here's a question. Assange is charged with rape because he did not use a condom.

He is?? Source, please. He is charged with rape because the condom ripped, the woman wanted to stop as a result, and he didn't. If there is another charge strictly regarding not using a condom, as the woman at no point objected, I'd appreciate a source backing up that claim.

[Canuckistani]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/17/julian-assange-sweden

[bleeding heart]

He is?? Source, please. He is charged with rape because the condom ripped, the woman wanted to stop as a result, and he didn't. If there is another charge strictly regarding not using a condom, as the woman at no point objected, I'd appreciate a source backing up that claim.

"Another charge"????

There are no charges.

I wonder, are people going to get tired of making this rather substantial factual mistake before or after everyone else gets tired of correcting them?

[Canuckistani]

"Another charge"????

There are no charges.

I wonder, are people going to get tired of making this rather substantial factual mistake before or after everyone else gets tired of correcting them?

Well, as the article makes clear, he skipped out on being questioned which could lead to charges. What's strange is the Swedes refusing to question him in England, they've done that with other people.

[bleeding heart]

Well, as the article makes clear, he skipped out on being questioned which could lead to charges. What's strange is the Swedes refusing to question him in England, they've done that with other people.

Yes, it's odd.

[Black Dog]

Yes, it's odd.

Not really, no.

Assange is not wanted for questioning, but arrest.

Edited August 30, 2012 by Black Dog

[Canuckistani]

Glad to see that's settled then.

[Moonlight Graham]

I feel bad for the men who are abused, both physically and emotionally/verbaly, by their female significant others. Of course I also feel bad for the women in the reverse, but little attention is paid to the male victims in comparision, and men are often ashamed to seek help in these kinds of circumstances because of embarrassment & stigma. They just "take it like a man". And it can be ignored by authorities & counsellors etc. because they won't often don't see female-on-male abuse as seriously as male-on-female abuse.

[Black Dog]

I feel bad for the men who are abused, both physically and emotionally/verbaly, by their female significant others. Of course I also feel bad for the women in the reverse, but little attention is paid to the male victims in comparision, and men are often ashamed to seek help in these kinds of circumstances because of embarrassment & stigma. They just "take it like a man". And it can be ignored by authorities & counsellors etc. because they won't often don't see female-on-male abuse as seriously as male-on-female abuse.

It's a shame for sure, but let's not pretend the two issues are equal in scope. (I'm sure you're not, but some do.)

[Canuckistani]

It's a shame for sure, but let's not pretend the two issues are equal in scope. (I'm sure you're not, but some do.)

It's more than a shame - I hope you're not suggesting we continue to sweep it under the carpet? Just because it is of lesser scope doesn't mean it should be ignored. Escpecially when sentencing women who do commit serious assaults or kill their men, and are given house arrest or parole.

[Guest American Woman]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/17/julian-assange-sweden

That actually confirms what I said.

[Guest American Woman]

I feel bad for the men who are abused, both physically and emotionally/verbaly, by their female significant others. Of course I also feel bad for the women in the reverse, but little attention is paid to the male victims in comparision, and men are often ashamed to seek help in these kinds of circumstances because of embarrassment & stigma. They just "take it like a man". And it can be ignored by authorities & counsellors etc. because they won't often don't see female-on-male abuse as seriously as male-on-female abuse.

I think that's why there's so little female abuse of males reported. For one, a lot of people don't believe it's possible, and secondly, they are ashamed. Men are supposed to be stronger than women, so it's a bit of an embarrassment to call the police and accuse a woman of beating them up. Also, men are supposed to be always excited about sex, so even if a woman were to 'help herself' when he's unconscious, I imagine he'd get a lot of 'ooh, why can't I be so lucky?' responses.

I, for one, object to the "humor" on television that revolves around a woman hitting a man or threatening to kick his butt. I don't think that's any more acceptable than a man directing such "humor" at a woman.

At any rate, a man can be sexually abused by a woman, and I think that needs to be recognized.

[Black Dog]

It's more than a shame - I hope you're not suggesting we continue to sweep it under the carpet? Just because it is of lesser scope doesn't mean it should be ignored.

Clearly I didn't say that it should be ignored. But the difference in scope is part of the reason why violence against women gets more attention, just as cancer or heart disease get more attention than otehr less common but no less fatal diseases.

Escpecially when sentencing women who do commit serious assaults or kill their men, and are given house arrest or parole.

Got a cite for that?

[betsy]

He is?? Source, please. He is charged with rape because the condom ripped, the woman wanted to stop as a result, and he didn't.

I wonder how that can be argued and defended in court. I mean, biologically, can men actually stop pronto in the middle of it - especially when they've reached what's called as, "the point of no return?"

[betsy]

I feel bad for the men who are abused, both physically and emotionally/verbaly, by their female significant others. Of course I also feel bad for the women in the reverse, but little attention is paid to the male victims in comparision, and men are often ashamed to seek help in these kinds of circumstances because of embarrassment & stigma. They just "take it like a man". And it can be ignored by authorities & counsellors etc. because they won't often don't see female-on-male abuse as seriously as male-on-female abuse.

Yes, and I'd imagine the psychological trauma - due to their gender as male - is quite different from what a female victim would feel (not that the trauma on the female victim is lessened).

It's just from different angles as victims - based on their gender.

[betsy]

In domestic violence and abuse, there are battered men too. And again, we hear less because of the shame of coming out to speak about it.

Scientist Hawking was one victim of abuse by his wife, if I'm not mistaken.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-411781/Hawkings-nurse-reveals-surprised-marriage-over.html

[bleeding heart]

I wonder how that can be argued and defended in court. I mean, biologically, can men actually stop pronto in the middle of it - especially when they've reached what's called as, "the point of no return?"

Yes. Wihout getting too graphic about it, our actions might be jerky and unwieldy and a bit comical at that moment...but yes, we can stop.

[Guest American Woman]

In domestic violence and abuse, there are battered men too. And again, we hear less because of the shame of coming out to speak about it.

I think that added to the shame is the disbelief by so many that it could happen; and if the man fights back at all in self defense, if the police are involved, too often the woman's bruises actually make him out as the abuser in the eyes of the law.

Edited August 31, 2012 by American Woman